On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Slevin McGuigan
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> wow, that was much very much information. Thanks for all the hints and the
> discussion. Please apologize when I missed something in one of your
> comments...
>
> My ideas/comments on what some of you wrote
>
> Michael Witten wro
On 2/5/11 10:49 PM, Michael Witten wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 20:09, Jon Seymour wrote:
>> I guess the point is that in versions of bash that do store the
>> timestamp in the .bash_history file
>
> To clarify, the timestamp is stored whenever HISTTIMEFORMAT has a
> non-null value; the bash v
Hi all,
wow, that was much very much information. Thanks for all the hints and
the discussion. Please apologize when I missed something in one of your
comments...
My ideas/comments on what some of you wrote
Michael Witten wrote:
..
> When you quit bash, the history is stored very naively in
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 20:09, Jon Seymour wrote:
> I guess the point is that in versions of bash that do store the
> timestamp in the .bash_history file
To clarify, the timestamp is stored whenever HISTTIMEFORMAT has a
non-null value; the bash version doesn't particularly matter unless
you're sug
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 20:12, Jon Seymour wrote:
> You don't have to do that - the timestamp is encoded in a "comment"
> line between entries. See the example below. One could simply assume
> all lines between two lines beginning with # are part of the one
> entry,
That's what I was saying.
Howe
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Michael Witten wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 20:02, Michael Witten wrote:
>> So, if you run `history', you'll not only get the commands in the
>> history list, but you'll also get the time at which the commands
>> were last run (formatted according to "$HISTTIMEF
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Michael Witten wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 19:15, Jon Seymour wrote:
>
> So, if you run `history', you'll not only get the commands in the
> history list, but you'll also get the time at which the commands
> were last run (formatted according to "$HISTTIMEFORMA
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 20:02, Michael Witten wrote:
> So, if you run `history', you'll not only get the commands in the
> history list, but you'll also get the time at which the commands
> were last run (formatted according to "$HISTTIMEFORMAT").
>
> In other words, it's not helpeful in this case.
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 19:15, Jon Seymour wrote:
> Here's the format I see in my history.
>
> #1296950184
> for i in 1 2
> do
> echo $i
> done
> #1296950194
> exit
>
> HISTTIMEFORMAT is:
>
> HISTTIMEFORMAT='[%m.%d.%y] %T '
>
>
> bash -version is:
>
> GNU bash, version 3.2.25(1)-release (i686-red
Here's the format I see in my history.
#1296950184
for i in 1 2
do
echo $i
done
#1296950194
exit
HISTTIMEFORMAT is:
HISTTIMEFORMAT='[%m.%d.%y] %T '
bash -version is:
GNU bash, version 3.2.25(1)-release (i686-redhat-linux-gnu)
Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
jon.
On Sun,
In the version I was using a line that began with # and perhaps a timestamp
separated each entry of the history in a way that in principle preserved
information about the entry boundary even though this information is not used
by bash on the subsequent start.
jon.
On 06/02/2011, at 11:24, Mich
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011, Michael Witten wrote:
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 18:02, Jon Seymour wrote:
The version I tried on Linux 3.2.25 does have a .bash_history
format that could support it, but it still behaved the same way.
How do you mean?
I'm running bash version "4.1.9(2)-release" on GNU/Linux
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 18:02, Jon Seymour wrote:
> The version I tried on Linux 3.2.25 does have a .bash_history
> format that could support it, but it still behaved the same way.
How do you mean?
I'm running bash version "4.1.9(2)-release" on GNU/Linux, and the
resulting history file doesn't se
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 15:56, Slevin McGuigan
wrote:
> I am unsure whether or not this a bug.
>From what I can tell, it's not so much a bug as it is an inadequacy:
When you quit bash, the history is stored very naively in "$HISTFILE";
the history is simply dumped to it line-by-line, and each line
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Slevin McGuigan wrote:
>> I am unsure whether or not this a bug. Anyhow, it is pretty annoying...
>>
>> I use simple multi-line scripts very often in bash and use vi mode
>> to edit them. By using
>> # shopt -s cmdhist
>> # shopt -s lithist
>> I
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 17:51, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Are you thinking that setting shopts should in some way be persistent
> across program invocations? That would be pretty annoying and a
> severe bug if it did.
>
> Are you forgetting to put your desired configuration into ~/.bashrc
> where it is l
Slevin McGuigan wrote:
> I am unsure whether or not this a bug. Anyhow, it is pretty annoying...
>
> I use simple multi-line scripts very often in bash and use vi mode
> to edit them. By using
> # shopt -s cmdhist
> # shopt -s lithist
> I can achive multi-line editing. Which is fine.
>
> But this
17 matches
Mail list logo
